No one else is a party to this, other than the family. That doesn't mean celebrities aren't going to weigh in or have an opinion. I think her spreading gossip is out of line. I also don't see this as any different than the opinions celebrities give about anyone else, like about Charlie Sheen or Mel Gibson's behavior.

In all honesty, if you know that a guy cheats, you can't be shocked that there's a possibility he had some kids outside of the marriage. It's not a great strech to assume when he has one that there could be more. I think that when you're a celebrity you do open yourself up to gossip and commentary by the public & other celebrities. This is no different. I am a bit dissapointed in Jane though - she didn't need to go there.

Logged

“Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.” ~ Groucho Marx

No one else is a party to this, other than the family. That doesn't mean celebrities aren't going to weigh in or have an opinion. I think her spreading gossip is out of line. I also don't see this as any different than the opinions celebrities give about anyone else, like about Charlie Sheen or Mel Gibson's behavior.

No one else is a party to this, other than the family. That doesn't mean celebrities aren't going to weigh in or have an opinion. I think her spreading gossip is out of line. I also don't see this as any different than the opinions celebrities give about anyone else, like about Charlie Sheen or Mel Gibson's behavior.

But she's speculating, not offering an opinion.

Well, technically, she's not speculating. She claims to have inside information about two other children. Again, not classy. I just don't think this is any more egregious than anything other people say when asked about scandals.

Um, just how do we know for certain that she's NOT a party to this? For all we know, she could well be a very, very involved party. One week ago, we'd be saying exactly the same thing about his "housekeeper."

Um, just how do we know for certain that she's NOT a party to this? For all we know, she could well be a very, very involved party. One week ago, we'd be saying exactly the same thing about his "housekeeper."

From what Jane said in that interview:

Quote

"From what I gather, I think there will be lots of information coming people's way," Seymour said. "I heard about two more [children] somebody else knows about. I even met someone who knows him well."

That doesn't sound to me like she's involved, or even that she knows Arnold. It sounds more to me like she's repeating what someone else told her.

Even if she DOES have solid proof of something she's not a reporter and the only way it's actually "news" is if his affairs affected the State of California. Otherwise it's gossip.

That's a rather limited definition of news, don't you think? Politics and state affairs are not the only things considered news. Especially in this case - as both members of the couple would be considered celebrities.

Does Arnold's affair and child with the housekeeper affect the state of California? I don't think so, but I see a lot of news coverage anyway. Are you saying that is also not news?

News really is defined by what people want to know, what people will read and watch. Of course, it is nice or morality driven to say peoples' personal lives as news is "gossip" but when they are famous, it becomes news.